The exact words of Lord Macaulay : available to genuine researchers in archives. Not for the "If it ain't on Google, it never happened" brigade.

"I accept catholic beyond the across and across of India and I accept not apparent one getting who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such abundance I accept apparent in this country, such top moral values, humans of such caliber, that I do not anticipate we would anytime beat this country, unless we breach the actual courage of this nation, which is her airy and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I adduce that we alter her old and age-old apprenticeship system, her culture, for if the Indians anticipate that all that is adopted and English is acceptable and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their built-in self-culture and they will become what we ambition them, a absolutely bedeviled nation."

The exact words of Lord Macaulay : available to genuine researchers in archives. Not for the "If it ain't on Google, it never happened" brigade.

"I accept catholic beyond the across and across of India and I accept not apparent one getting who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such abundance I accept apparent in this country, such top moral values, humans of such caliber, that I do not anticipate we would anytime beat this country, unless we breach the actual courage of this nation, which is her airy and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I adduce that we alter her old and age-old apprenticeship system, her culture, for if the Indians anticipate that all that is adopted and English is acceptable and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their built-in self-culture and they will become what we ambition them, a absolutely bedeviled nation."

And where did you get this quote? You don't cite the source, and criticizing using Google, but substitute something worse. The quote above is poor English, and clearly wasn't what was actually said by a native speaker. "I accept catholic beyond" is not proper Engish. It is clear that the quote above not what a mid-19th century British English speaker would say, but has all the hallmarks of an Indian speaker would say. Words like "built-in" are clear an anachronism. The word "built-in" didn't arise until 1895, decades after this speech. Built-in | Define Built-in at Dictionary.com

The exact words of Lord Macaulay : available to genuine researchers in archives. Not for the "If it ain't on Google, it never happened" brigade.

"I accept catholic beyond the across and across of India and I accept not apparent one getting who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such abundance I accept apparent in this country, such top moral values, humans of such caliber, that I do not anticipate we would anytime beat this country, unless we breach the actual courage of this nation, which is her airy and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I adduce that we alter her old and age-old apprenticeship system, her culture, for if the Indians anticipate that all that is adopted and English is acceptable and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their built-in self-culture and they will become what we ambition them, a absolutely bedeviled nation."

This is clearly not the work of a native English speaker, let alone a 19th century British PM, a group which tended to be even more linguistically inclined and eloquent than the average person.

Oh dear, oh dear, how could anyone take that illiterate drivel as being by Macaulay, who was a master of the English language? The sentiments too are foreign to him, for reasons that have been discussed above.

This is in fact a free variation on the usual pseudo-quotation (which I have already shown to be a fake), apparently made by an Indonesian who himself writes in this way:

" These "are" the words of Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay (1800-1859), affiliate of the administering board of the East India Company from 1834 to 1838, excerpted from his accent delivered on Feb. 2, 1835. Reading these words about two centuries later, I apprehend that Lord Macaulay is not dead. Hence, my use of "are" and not "were." His account are still alive. He still has a ample afterward all over the world.

A actual baby acquaintance of abundance tells me that absolutely the alleged Indian Dominion beneath the British Rule was built-in in 1835 with Lord Macaulay arena the role of midwife. Macaulay attacked the actual foundations of the age-old Indian civilization, and he was successful.

How abounding of us in Indonesia apprehend that the aforementioned is accident to us, in this avant-garde age? We are amidst by not one or two, but a aggregation of Macaulays. The alone aberration being: the acclaimed or abominable Macaulay of old was English, white, and accordingly calmly distinguishable. Now, the present brand of Macaulays comes in all colors and shades, whites, browns, reds, yellows and even blacks.

And, they are advancing our cultural roots and age-old acculturation from all sides. One of them, the wahabbis, which are accurate by the Saudi Monarchy, accept so acutely infiltrated our association and amusing system, that we are now abashed and clumsy to analyze airy ethics of adoration from religious radicalism. Some of our ministers, top officials, even aggressive cadre and political parties are getting "used" as their agents to advance us from within."

The question arose as to whether education (above an elementary level of course) should best be conducted in English and concentrate on European learning; and with the best intentions, as a man who strongly believed in 'progress' in a British context as well as in an Indian one, Macaulay urged that an essentially European education through the medium of English would be most beneficial. In arguing his case, he made disparaging remarks about the value of Eastern (notably Sanskrit and Arabic) literature and learning which caused offence. His minute on education in India may be found in full here:

From what I was taught in my history class,Lord Macaulay only told about reforming the Indian education system.He only criticized the education system and not the culture of India.

Well he indeed criticized the eastern culture. And frankly speaking I have some doubts whether he really have any mature understanding of Indian literature at all as claimed by him in the speech. As in his whole speech he used the word arabic. while AFAIK Urdu and to some extent Persian was the preferred language of Indian muslims. Arabic as a language was never used by the Indian muslims.

Btw Macaulay also drafted Indian penal codes, which were later on reproduced in other British colonies. And they are still used in many of the former British colonies including India itself.